Walsh v. Walsh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 59 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “". . . According to Article 607 [of the Code of Practice, the source of LSA-C.C.P. Art. 2004], one of the cases in which such judgment may be annulled is where it appears that it was obtained by ill practices on the part of the party in whose favor it was rendered. Under the jurisprudence any improper practice or procedure which enables a party to obtain a definitive judgment comes within the meaning of this article. The courts have looked at each case from a purely equitable viewpoint to ascertain whether allowing the judgment to stand would be inequitable or unconscionable in view of the practice or procedure which enabled the party to obtain such judgment." (Emphasis supplied.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 79 So. 2d 625 - Romero v. Galley · 284 So. 2d 149 - Johnston v. Smith

2. “In this postulate, counsel failed to take into account the difference between a judgment which may be erroneous as a matter of law, because of an insufficiency of evidence or otherwise, and one procured by fraud, ill-practice or misrepresentation. It is only in the latter case that the action of nullity is permissible under Article 607 of the Code of Practice—for it is firmly established that the remedy cannot be employed as a substitute for an appeal. State [ex rel. Pelletier] v. Sommerville, 112 La. 1091 , 36 So. 864 ; Emuy v. Farr, 125 La. 825 , 51 So. 1003 ; Miller v. Miller, 156 La. 46 , 100 So. 45 , and Vinson v. Picolo, La. App., 15 So.2d 778 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 70 So. 2d 752 - Cryer v. Cryer

3. ““ * * * The remedy given by said article [607] * * * is not restrictive. The courts of this state will not hesitate to afford relief against judgments, irrespective of any issue of inattention or neglect, when the circumstances under which the judgment is rendered show the deprivation of legal rights of the litigant who seeks relief, 'and when the enforcement of the judgment would be unconscientious and inequitable. Our courts will follow the general principles of equity-jurisprudence applied by the equity courts of the other states of this country in actions of this character. * * t-»”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Alonso v. Bowers